EVIDENCE BASED PRACTICE

Evidence Based Practice

Evidence Based Practice

Introduction

The widespread introduction of evidence-based medical practice is largely due to the economic aspect. On how convincing scientific evidence regarding the clinical and cost effectiveness depends on correct positioning means. Naturally, the most effective direct these resources to the development of methods for prevention, diagnosis and treatment, practical use has been confirmed by studies that meet the criteria of evidence-based medical practice. Currently, the "gold standard" randomized controlled trials are considered when patients divided into groups at random (randomization), and the group should not vary according to the parameters affecting the outcome. Every year hundreds of published results of randomized controlled trials that change the established standards of healing. None of the new treatment, prevention or diagnosis can be considered without the mandatory scrutiny in randomized controlled trials. Particular attention should be paid not only useless, but the lack of scientific evidence-based use of various methods of treatment and prevention. Currently, this provision is particularly relevant, since there was a clear tendency to a predominance of clinical research funded by the pharmaceutical industry and manufacturers of various medical products and services (Jaul, 2010, 311-325). This paper would focus on the study of the Evidence Based Practice, along with its utilization and importance in the modern world.

Evidence Based Practice

Evidence-Based Practice is the integration of best research evidence with clinical expertise and patient values. To improve the efficiency of pre-randomization stratification is used (stratum - layer formation). The meaning of stratification is that the distribution of treatment options is carried out in homogeneous groups of patients formed on the leading prognostic features. The smaller will vary with each patient within the group and the larger the differences between the groups with the correct choice of sign of the stratification, the more reliable the results of the study. The conclusion about the significance of differences in the effect of the treatment or prevention can be done only under homogeneity compared groups on the most important prognostic factors. Unfortunately, many studies under the "materiality" or "minor" differences in the distribution of these factors only understand the presence or absence of statistically significant differences. Meanwhile, it is obvious that the influence of prognostic factors on the result not so much determined by comparing the frequency of its occurrence in the individual treatment groups as "predictive power" (Jaul, 2010, 311-325).

"Strong" prognostic factor may exert a greater influence on the result of comparing the effectiveness of two treatments (even if not statistically significant difference in its frequency in the two groups) than that varies considerably in frequency, but the "poor" prognostic factor. Wrong approach to assessing the statistical reliability of the information often leads to neglect of clinically important information and take into account the clinically useless data. Significantly increasing the number of observations, the researchers can prove the existence of even such small differences, which have no clinical significance. It is therefore important to understand that the statistical significance - it is not synonymous with clinical significance of the results of ...